CTC forum thread on 'Charity' status
- Thread starter dellzeqq
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
theclaud said:
we still think he's looking for work in architecture but maybe he's set his sights on an opportunity here
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
Pie charts are far too easy to understand, you want to go for some 3D block graphs and don't use distinct colours
That's a very tasteful palette, but a little tricky for the colour-blinds like me. Like most things, I'll have the good Mrs Dr Bollo explain it to me.MacB said:
After a rare lurk on the CTC forum thread covering this topic, I can see how the transfer to charity status may get through. I get the impression that the committed core of CTC members are generally anti-charity status. These are the people that know faces and characters, will have an appreciation of the politics and are going to turn up at AGMs and will most definitely vote. There's a problem though, and that problem is me, or rather members like me.
I joined the CTC specifically to support the campaigning element. Not the proactive campaigning so much (STOP SMIDSY is an example), but more as an expert voice when the lot of the cyclist is being crapped on by the government, local council or drunk judge. The CTC may not be perfect, but in its present form its the best, most independent voice we have.
Apart from my recent sighting at a FNRttC, that's it between me and the CTC. At best I'm a consumer of a very limited range of its services (if Simon can be called a service - if so, its silver!). I don't have the grounding or an interest in the internal politics and, if it weren't for threads on CC, I wouldn't even have an idea there was a real issue with the conversion to a charity. I'd simply pick up my copy of Cycle from the water closet library, skip that article about the charity-thingy-meh and have a chuckle at Chris Juden getting angry about toe overlap again.
This is just speculation, but I imagine the executive (is that right? oooh I AM getting into the politics!) can see a scenario where the core members vote against and the rump of 'consumer' members like me just errr..... don't bother. Hence the use of the CTC channels of communication to hammer away the pro-vote message to get enough of us to stir our stumps and tick the box that we're told to tick, because like hell we're going to research the issues.
I'll finish with an observation. The CTC website charity status page suggests that we should get involved by going to AGMs, asking questions of councillors, emailing a dedicated email address or even sending an urchin with a telegram. It certainly doesn't mention the CTC Forum, which is strange considering that this would be the most open, accessible and balanced medium through which to discuss the issues. Afraid of what might get found out?
a fair analysis. The irony is that Campaigning is in no better a position if the Club is taken over by the Trust - charity status will limit the scope and intention of Campaigning.
The strength of the 'nay' campaign is that nobody joins for the stuff that the Trust blows money on. The weakness is, as you suggest, we're not going to get a sniff at Newsnet, which is already blowing the trumpet for the takeover. The 600 words I've done for the next issue of Cycle is nicely presented and may just lead people to the blog - which needs work - but Newsnet would be the biggie....
The strength of the 'nay' campaign is that nobody joins for the stuff that the Trust blows money on. The weakness is, as you suggest, we're not going to get a sniff at Newsnet, which is already blowing the trumpet for the takeover. The 600 words I've done for the next issue of Cycle is nicely presented and may just lead people to the blog - which needs work - but Newsnet would be the biggie....
